User talk:Blow of Light
I confirm that my freenode nick is BoL
 | This user seeks adoption by an experienced editor. (Users offering adoption) |
Blow of Light's status: In da hood. 
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Index
|
|||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 3 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
If anyone claims I am a sockpuppet of anyone, please click on the sock icon on the upper right of this page. You will see all my non-operational socks. If you suspect I am a sock of someone, I invite you to perform a checkuser on me, on the spot (you can get started here if you wish), no questions asked. —BoL 04:41, 15 February 2008 (UTC) Via e-mail
- I will respond to messages here for sure. If I feel like rambling, you'll see it on your talk page.
- If you want to attack me, be kind, and I'll be kind. If you want to be a dick anyway, fine, only make one. After that, you'll get these.
- Please post new messages at the bottom. and sign your posts with 4 tildes: ~~~~ Any messages that do not comply with the rules will be disposed of properly unless you are not an autoconfirmed user. Also, if Sinebot signs someone's entry, he will do something to you.
- Thank you!
- On the IRC Freenode network as BoL
- Via e-mail
help
thanks for all your help editing Battle of Mediolanum its been crap for like 2 years now and its really needed to be fixed. dont worry about htose guys over at the admin page their just trying to thelp just take their sugestions that sound good to you and do your own thing and try not to get blockedor sanctioned or something. yore a good editor and it hink that you are will just keep getting better and beter if you stay. Smith Jones (talk)
External map service links
Hello. You have been identified as having added or removed direct external map service links in articles[1]. There is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:External links#Issues with inclusion or exclusion of map service links about which should be done, and some more opinions would be good to find community consensus. --Para (talk) 22:59, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Happy Valentine's Day!
A short/sweet little message, which I hope has made your day better! Happy Valentine's Day!!! Wilhelmina Will (talk) 02:37, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- Aw, thanks, Wilhelmina Will! Happy V-day to you too! :) —BoL 03:45, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 11th, 2008.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 7 | 11 February 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:11, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 11th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 7 | 11 February 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:34, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Magic Kingdom (reverted to clean revision with no trash)
Why was that considered trash?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Adznet (talk • contribs)
- That was kind of harsh. 1--Antonio Lopez (talk) 02:35, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, I thought that was spam. :( sorry! —BoL 04:38, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article Rashidul Bari, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 23:00, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your work on this -- I know it's frustrating. I just checked my watchlist and saw I'd missed your firefight.
I went ahead and blacklisted the new variant of the asiafanclub link --that may calm things down a bit, I hope:
This one has a lot of disruptive history:
- Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Mondrago
- Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive362
- Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Mondrago
- Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive366
- Talk:Asia (band)
Thanks again, --A. B. (talk) 05:31, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- You're welcome. Here's another one you can add: User talk:4.238.124.247, and he made a lega threat too! —BoL 05:33, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Now blocked. --A. B. (talk) 05:48, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- We got another one, it's on your talk page. —BoL 05:48, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Now blocked. --A. B. (talk) 05:48, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Per this report, please use more discretion when reporting user names to WP:UAA, especially considering that user was making constructive edits. Mønobi 05:38, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, OK, thanks, dealing wit a spamma right now. —BoL 05:42, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
MY Talk Page
- I am curious why you took Billy T. Fried's comments off my talk page. First, this matter was "resolved" without any input from me -- it's my Talk page, afterall. Second, the discussion about this matter occurred in Handling sock puppetry (block review), not in a forum set aside especially for this matter to be discussed. Third, how can something Billy T. Fried wrote on my Talk page constitute an attack by me against him? That's absurd. Fourth, I am the subject of a tabloid article in the SF Weekly called "Wikipedia Idiots: The Edit Wars of San Francisco", and I have parred down my Talk page to items that pertain to that article in case readers of that article want to come to my Talk page to see my side of the story. Billy's comment on my Talk page was mentioned in the article. In fairness to me, readers of that article should be able to see what Billy wrote and judge for it themselves, not judge in the light of how the author of the article presented it. In order for readers to see my side, Billy's comment has to be where readers can find it. That's only fair to me. Griot (talk) 06:36, 17 February 2008 (UTC)